What’s the goal in Libya?

Today’s editorial: With no clear endgame, is this yet another open-ended conflict for the United States?

__________________________

So here is the United States in an air campaign in Libya, not in charge yet leading the charge, with one general saying Moammar Gadhafi might stay, the President saying his nearly 42 years in power are finished, and Congress, as usual, all over the map.

The American people are entitled to know what we are fighting for. And how will we know when the fight is over.

After 10 years of war in Afghanistan and eight years in Iraq, we would think the United States has learned that without a clear mission and exit strategy, it can be exceedingly difficult to extricate itself from a conflict. Wars started to remove specific targets and leaders — al-Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan and non-existent weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein in Iraq — became long-term commitments once the task turned to nation building.

For all the talk of a humanitarian mission, this is not a mere food delivery, photo-op and farewell. We’re helping a disorganized group of rebels bent on overthrowing one of the longest-lasting leaders of the past century. And we aren’t even agreed among ourselves on the goal. The lead U.S. commander, Army Gen. Carter Ham, says Mr. Gadhafi might stay in power; President Obama declares that “it is U.S. policy that Gadhafi has to go.” In Congress, some, like Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., call for stronger action, while those like Rep. Chris Gibson, R-Kinderhook, say we have no business in this fight.

And we’re blowing things up. As former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell warned President George W. Bush about going into Iraq, you break it, you own it.

Well, we’ve destroyed an estimated half of Libya’s air defenses so far to enforce a no-fly zone over that nation.

The point? That’s not clear. While it would seem to give the cornered Libyan rebels more of a fighting chance in their struggle against Mr. Gadhafi, that’s not part of the U.N. mandate under which the United States and several other countries are acting. The point of the mandate was to establish a cease-fire, to end attacks on and abuses of civilians, “intensify efforts to find a solution to the crisis which responds to the legitimate demands of the Libyan people,” and facilitate “dialogue to lead to the political reforms necessary to find a peaceful and sustainable solution.”

Where do we go from here? Defense Secretary Robert Gates, among others, says that other countries will be doing more soon and the United States can step back. That sounds like a wish, not a plan.

Without a plan — without a clear, attainable goal — we can find ourselves in no time months or years down the road, unable to walk away, wondering, just as we are now, exactly what we’re doing there.